I think pets, particularly dogs, are a very emotive issue.

There used to be RSPCA and a couple more in the Bradford area. We got a rescue dog from each one of the non-RSPCA ones in recent years, and both are now shut. Haven't looked recently but so far as I know if not the RSPCA then there's nothing else now except rehoming organisations, but they don't have a kennels like the Manchester fire one.



I don't know about Manchester except what I read after this fire but they reportedly just have another one, which took as many of the dogs as it could.



Do you think they are all over the place, or what, as I don't really get why you asked?

You said places were few & far between when talking about the happenings in Manchester. You didn't qualify it. I can't see how your perception of Bradford is relevant to Manchester, upon which you were commenting & claiming there weren't enough of the type of place that burned down.

Then you appear to have difficulty in either reading, thinking, or both. I said:



... which they are.



I [ididn't[/i say:



and the context makes it perfectly clear that the comment was a general one, and not restricted to Manchester. I find it hard to see how a reasonable person would think otherwise.



I find it also hard to get the point of it, since if I had restricted the comment to Manchester, it would still, seemingly, be true as according to the reports I have read there is only 1 other similar sized place, and that wasn't big enough to take all the dogs, many of which are having to be 'fostered'.



But I find it harder to work out why a reasonable person would want to derail a thread about the terrible events at Manchester Dogs Home with some bogus and pointless argument about semantics.

Not sure that they actually have a dogs home in Bradford at all, our dog came from the Dogs Trust in Leeds but he was picked up as an abandoned stray in Bradford by the councils dog warden, kept for seven days by the warden service then passed to DT Leeds.

It's not a matter of semantics. Or my reading & comprehension skills.



have you got anything to back up your claim that there is a shortage of these sort of places? Are we now to assume you meant nationally? Or did you mean in Manchester, or Bradford?



Your emotions are getting the better of you, it would seem.

Everything to do, that and your strange need to deflect the thread and try to score points





Of course. Do you actually think there isn't, though? I mean, what is the point of demanding I "back up" my "claim"? (Which was of course an observation in conversation, rather than a "claim"icon_wink.gif when I'd have thought you'd have a good idea that thousands of dogs have to be destroyed year on year as there is no rescue home accommodation for them? Is this something that has passed you by?







First, cut the "we" crap, you aren't speaking for anyone else, you're on your own with this oddball convo. Next, I take it that you now understand what I wrote? Well done.





"Seem"? To whom? On what possible basis? Meaningless nonsense. You've lost the plot!

Is the fact the dogs are put down due to the cost of keeping them or a lack of space?

Both.



The only reason that Dogs Trust manage to honour their "We never put a healthy dog to sleep" promise is because they do not have an open door to every stray that is picked up, its always a case of one out one in, fortunately they have a high rehoming level and there is a constant flow through the door - mainly terrier variations as is the current fashion...

Does it matter? If otherwise healthy dogs are put down, either on cost of keeping grounds or for lack of space, it's the same thing, isn't it?



I mean, in the unlikely event that there are acres of rescue-dog cages that are there but never used, because the rescue centre can't afford to, then they might as well not be there at all, wouldn't you say?



FWIW most rescue centres are pretty much full, most of the time. Given that well in excess of 100,000 stray dogs are rounded up each year, that's not surprising. Of course the majority of these are not destroyed, in fact around 7% are destroyed, of which around half are not destroyed for behavioural issues or illness and as no rescue centre you might think would destroy the rest for no reason, probably the other half is a reasonable estimate of the number destroyed for lack of resources.



In the year to March 2014 around 1.300 strays were put to sleep in the general Yorkshire region.

Depends on your definition of "rescue centre" though, I contribute some effort occasionally to a German Shepherd rescue group who fundraise to pay for commercial kennel space for GSD's that have been handed over for rehoming for a variety of reasons, such rescue groups would never destroy a healthy dog (and the one I am involved in don't even euthanise sick dogs unless its on vets advice) as its in direct conflict with their reason for being.



However part of the rescuing that happens involves other "rescue centres" which are really just holding centres for abandoned dogs, I almost hesitate to name the RSPCA as they aren't the only ones, but its fairly common to find an appeal made for funding for a GSD (in this instance) who is on a time limited stay in a "holding centre", generally recognised breeds will always go to dedicated breed rescue organisations but for the mongrols its often euthanasia simply because there is nowhere else to put them.



Its even worse in the USA where there are constant appeals to help dogs even from recognised breeds that have only days left before euthanasia.

Commonly known as "pounds". Most Council Dog Warden strays are put in this type of kennel facility. My Staffy/Collie was in the "pound" in Wakefield and was on her last day (7th day) and ready to be euthanised. West Yorkshire Dog Rescue stepped in. They don't have kennels, but instead have fosterers who will have the dog until a home is found regardless of length of time.